Discovery of gamma-ray emission from the shell-type supernova

Draft version October 15, 2008 Preprint typeset using LATEX style emulateapj v. 08/13/06

arXiv:0810.2689v1 [astro-ph] 15 Oct 2008

DISCOVERY OF GAMMA-RAY EMISSION FROM THE SHELL-TYPE SUPERNOVA REMNANT RCW 86 WITH H.E.S.S. F. Aharonian 1,13 , A.G. Akhperjanian 2 , U. Barres de Almeida 8,a , A.R. Bazer-Bachi 3 , B. Behera 14 , ¨ hr 1,5 , C. Boisson 6 , A. Bochow 1 , V. Borrel 3 , I. Braun 1 , E. Brion 7 , M. Beilicke 4 , W. Benbow 1 , K. Bernlo ¨ hler 1 , T. Bulik 24 , I. Bu ¨ sching 9 , T. Boutelier 17 , S. Carrigan 1 , P.M. Chadwick 8 , J. Brucker 16 , R. Bu A. Charbonnier 19 , R.C.G. Chaves 1 , L.-M. Chounet 10 , A.C. Clapson 1 , G. Coignet 11 , L. Costamante 1,29 , M. Dalton 5 , B. Degrange 10 , H.J. Dickinson 8 , A. Djannati-Ata¨ı 12 , W. Domainko 1 , L.O’C. Drury 13 , F. Dubois 11 , G. Dubus 17 , J. Dyks 24 , K. Egberts 1 , D. Emmanoulopoulos 14 , P. Espigat 12 , C. Farnier 15 , F. Feinstein 15 , ¨ rster 1 , G. Fontaine 10 , M. Fu ¨ ßling 5 , S. Gabici 13 , Y.A. Gallant 15 , L. G´ A. Fiasson 15 , A. Fo erard 12 , ¨ ck 16 , P. Goret 7 , C. Hadjichristidis 8 , D. Hauser 14 , M. Hauser 14 , B. Giebels 10 , J.F. Glicenstein 7 , B. Glu G. Heinzelmann 4 , G. Henri 17 , G. Hermann 1 , J.A. Hinton 25 , A. Hoffmann 18 , W. Hofmann 1 , M. Holleran 9 , ´ ski 27 , S. Kaufmann 14 , S. Hoppe 1 , D. Horns 4 , A. Jacholkowska 19 , O.C. de Jager 9 , I. Jung 16 , K. Katarzyn 10 8 18 5 1 ´ E. Kendziorra , M. Kerschhaggl , D. Khangulyan B. Khelifi , D. Keogh , Nu. Komin 15 , K. Kosack 1 , G. Lamanna 11 , I.J. Latham 8 , M. Lemoine-Goumard b , J.-P. Lenain 6 , T. Lohse 5 , V. Marandon 12 , J.M. Martin 6 , O. Martineau-Huynh 19 , A. Marcowith 15 , C. Masterson 13 , D. Maurin 19 , T.J.L. McComb 8 , C. Medina 6 , R. Moderski 24 , E. Moulin 7 , M. Naumann-Godo 10 , M. de Naurois 19 , D. Nedbal 20 , D. Nekrassov 1 , J. Niemiec 28 , ˜ a Wilhelmi 12,29 , K.J. Orford 8 , J.L. Osborne 8 , M. Ostrowski 23 , S.J. Nolan 8 , S. Ohm 1 , J-F. Olive 3 , E. de On ¨ hlhofer 14 , M. Punch 12 , M. Panter 1 , G. Pedaletti 14 , G. Pelletier 17 , P.-O. Petrucci 17 , S. Pita 12 , G. Pu A. Quirrenbach 14 , B.C. Raubenheimer 9 , M. Raue 1,29 , S.M. Rayner 8 , M. Renaud 1 , F. Rieger 1,29 J. Ripken 4 , L. Rob 20 , S. Rosier-Lees 11 , G. Rowell 26 , B. Rudak 24 , J. Ruppel 21 , V. Sahakian 2 , A. Santangelo 18 , ¨ ck 16 , R. Schro ¨ der 21 , U. Schwanke 5 , S. Schwarzburg 18 , S. Schwemmer 14 , R. Schlickeiser 21 , F.M. Scho 21 25 6 A. Shalchi , J.L. Skilton , H. Sol , D. Spangler 8 , L. Stawarz 23 , R. Steenkamp 22 , C. Stegmann 16 , G. Superina 10 , P.H. Tam 14 , J.-P. Tavernet 19 , R. Terrier 12 , O. Tibolla 14 , C. van Eldik 1 , G. Vasileiadis 15 , ¨ lk 1 , F. Volpe 10,29 , S.J. Wagner 14 , C. Venter 9 , J.P. Vialle 11 , P. Vincent 19 , J. Vink 30 , M. Vivier 7 , H.J. Vo M. Ward 8 , A.A. Zdziarski 24 , A. Zech 6 Draft version October 15, 2008

ABSTRACT The shell-type supernova remnant (SNR) RCW 86, possibly associated with the historical supernova SN 185, with its relatively large size (about 40’ in diameter) and the presence of non-thermal X-rays is a promising target for γ-ray observations. The high sensitivity, good angular resolution of a few arc minutes and the large field of view of the High Energy Stereoscopic System (H.E.S.S.) make it ideally suited for the study of the γ-ray morphology of such extended sources. H.E.S.S. observations have indeed led to the discovery of the SNR RCW 86 in very high energy (VHE; E > 100 GeV) γ-rays. With 31 hours of observation time, the source is detected with a statistical significance of 8.5σ and is significantly more extended than the H.E.S.S. point spread function. Morphological studies have been performed and show that the γ-ray flux does not correlate perfectly with the X-ray emission. The flux from the remnant is ∼10% of the flux from the Crab nebula, with a similar photon index of about 2.5. Possible origins of the very high energy gamma-ray emission, via either Inverse Compton scattering by electrons or the decay of neutral pions produced by proton interactions, are discussed on the basis of spectral features obtained both in the X-ray and γ-ray regimes. Subject headings: gamma-rays: observations – supernova remnants: general– supernova remnants: individual RCW 86 – H.E.S.S.

* Correspondence and request for material should be sent to [email protected] & [email protected] 1 Max-Planck-Institut f¨ ur Kernphysik, P.O. Box 103980, D 69029 Heidelberg, Germany 2 Yerevan Physics Institute, 2 Alikhanian Brothers St., 375036 Yerevan, Armenia 3 Centre d’Etude Spatiale des Rayonnements, CNRS/UPS, 9 av. du Colonel Roche, BP 4346, F-31029 Toulouse Cedex 4, France 4 Universit¨ at Hamburg, Institut f¨ ur Experimentalphysik, Luruper Chaussee 149, D 22761 Hamburg, Germany 5 Institut f¨ ur Physik, Humboldt-Universit¨ at zu Berlin, Newtonstr. 15, D 12489 Berlin, Germany 6 LUTH, Observatoire de Paris, CNRS, Universit´ e Paris Diderot, 5 Place Jules Janssen, 92190 Meudon, France 7 IRFU/DSM/CEA, CE Saclay, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, Cedex, France 8 University of Durham, Department of Physics, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, U.K. 9 Unit for Space Physics, North-West University, Potchefstroom

2520, South Africa 10 Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, F-91128 Palaiseau, France 11 Laboratoire d’Annecy-le-Vieux de Physique des Particules, CNRS/IN2P3, 9 Chemin de Bellevue - BP 110 F-74941 Annecyle-Vieux Cedex, France 12 Astroparticule et Cosmologie (APC), CNRS, Universite Paris 7 Denis Diderot, 10, rue Alice Domon et Leonie Duquet, F-75205 Paris Cedex 13, France 13 Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 5 Merrion Square, Dublin 2, Ireland 14 Landessternwarte, Universit¨ at Heidelberg, K¨ onigstuhl, D 69117 Heidelberg, Germany 15 Laboratoire de Physique Th´ eorique et Astroparticules, CNRS/IN2P3, Universit´ e Montpellier II, CC 70, Place Eug` ene Bataillon, F-34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France 16 Universit¨ at Erlangen-N¨ urnberg, Physikalisches Institut, Erwin-Rommel-Str. 1, D 91058 Erlangen, Germany 17 Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Grenoble, INSU/CNRS,

2

F. A. Aharonian et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 1. INTRODUCTION

Shell-type supernova remnants (SNR) are widely believed to be the prime candidates for accelerating cosmic ray protons and nuclei up to 1015 eV. A promising way of proving the existence of high energy hadrons accelerated in SNR shells is the detection of very high energy (VHE; E > 100 GeV) γ-rays produced in nucleonic interactions with ambient matter. VHE γ-ray emission has been detected recently in several shell-type SNRs, especially from Cassiopeia A (Aharonian et al. (2001), Albert et al. (2007)), RX J1713.7-3946 (Aharonian et al. 2007a) and RX J0852.0-4622 (Aharonian et al. 2007b). These two latest sources both show an extended morphology highly correlated with the structures seen in non-thermal Xrays. Although a hadronic origin is probable in the above cases (e.g. Berezhko & V¨ olk 2006), a leptonic origin can not be ruled out (e.g. Porter et al. 2006). Another young shell-type SNR is RCW 86 (also known as G315.4-2.3 and MSH 14 − 63 ). It has a complete shell in radio (Kesteven & Caswell 1987), optical (Smith 1997) and X-rays (Pisarski et al. 1984), with a nearly circular shape of 40’ diameter. It received substantial attention because of its possible association with SN 185, the first historical Galactic supernova (Clark & Stephenson 1977). However, conclusive evidence for this connection is still missing: using optical observations, Rosado et al. (1996) found an apparent kinematic distance of 2.8 kpc and an age of ∼ 10 000 years, whereas recent observations of the North-East part of the remnant with the Chandra and XMM-Newton satellites strengthen the case that the event recorded by the Chinese in 185 AD was a supernova and that RCW 86 is its remnant (Vink et al. 2006). In this case, a distance to the SNR of ∼ 1 kpc can be estimated for a standard Sedov evolution sceUniversit´ e Joseph Fourier, BP 53, F-38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France 18 Institut f¨ ur Astronomie und Astrophysik, Universit¨ at T¨ ubingen, Sand 1, D 72076 T¨ ubingen, Germany 19 LPNHE, Universit´ e Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Universit´ e Denis Diderot Paris 7, CNRS/IN2P3, 4 Place Jussieu, F-75252, Paris Cedex 5, France 20 Institute of Particle and Nuclear Physics, Charles University, V Holesovickach 2, 180 00 Prague 8, Czech Republic 21 Institut f¨ ur Theoretische Physik, Lehrstuhl IV: Weltraum und Astrophysik, Ruhr-Universit¨ at Bochum, D 44780 Bochum, Germany 22 University of Namibia, Private Bag 13301, Windhoek, Namibia 23 Obserwatorium Astronomiczne, Uniwersytet Jagiello´ nski, Krak´ ow, Poland 24 Nicolaus Copernicus Astronomical Center, ul. Bartycka 18, 00-716 Warsaw, Poland 25 School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK 26 School of Chemistry & Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia 27 Toru´ n Centre for Astronomy, Nicolaus Copernicus University, ul. Gagarina 11, 87-100 Toru´ n, Poland 28 Instytut Fizyki J¸ adrowej PAN, ul. Radzikowskiego 152, 31-342 Krak´ ow, Poland 29 European Associated Laboratory for Gamma-Ray Astronomy, jointly supported by CNRS and MPG 30 Astronomical Institute, Utrecht University, PO Box 80000, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands a supported by CAPES Foundation, Ministry of Education of Brazil b M. Lemoine-Goumard, Universit´ e Bordeaux I, CNRS/IN2P3, Centre d’Etudes nucl´ eaires de Bordeaux Gradignan, UMR 5797, Chemin du Solarium, 33175 Gradignan, France

nario (Bocchino et al. 2000). The X-ray spectrum obtained with the Einstein satellite was first represented by a two-temperature plasma model (Winkler 1978). Then, RXTE (Petre et al. 1999) and ASCA observations (Bamba et al. (2000), Borkowski et al. (2001)), with a wider spectral coverage, were used to resolve a nonthermal component in the X-ray spectrum which can be well described by a soft power-law with a photon index of ∼ 3. The large-scale density gradient across RCW 86 (Pisarski et al. (1984) and Claas et al. (1989)) possibly suggests that the northern part could be the shocked half of a very low-density wind bubble plus dense shell from the progenitor star, and to this extent it could well be similar to RX J1713.7-3946 and RX J0852.0-4622. In its southern part, RCW 86 contains an HII region. Apparently, the gas density in this HII region is rather high and spatially extended. Therefore, the SNR shock has swept over an extended high density region in the South, with consequent high radio and thermal X-ray emissions (Bocchino et al. 2000). With a diameter of about 40’, RCW 86 is one of the very few non-thermal Xray emitting SNRs resolvable in VHE γ-rays. H.E.S.S., with its high sensitivity, its good angular resolution and its large field of view is ideally suited for morphology studies of such an extended object. Evidence for γ-ray emission from RCW 86 was found using the CANGAROO-II instrument, but no firm detection was claimed (Watanabe et al. 2003). Here, we present data on RCW 86 obtained with the full H.E.S.S. array between 2004 and 2007. 2. H.E.S.S. OBSERVATIONS AND ANALYSIS METHODS

H.E.S.S. is an array of four imaging Cherenkov telescopes located 1800 m above sea level in the Khomas Highland in Namibia (Hinton 2004). Each telescope has a tesselated mirror with an area of 107 m2 (Bernl¨ohr et al. 2003) and is equipped with a camera comprising 960 photomultipliers (Vincent et al. 2003) covering a field of view of 5◦ in diameter. Due to the effective rejection of hadronic air showers with the stereoscopic imaging technique, the H.E.S.S. telescope system can detect point sources near zenith at flux levels of about 1% of the Crab nebula flux with a statistical significance of 5 σ standard deviation in 25 hours of observation (Aharonian et al. 2006). The shell-type SNR RCW 86 was observed between 2004 and 2007 with the complete H.E.S.S. array. After standard data quality selection and dead time correction, the resulting live time is 31 hours. The observations have been carried out at zenith angles ranging from 38◦ to 53◦ . The data were taken using the wobble mode where the source is offset from the centre of the field of view, alternating between 28 minute runs in the positive and negative declination or right ascension directions; the mean offset angle of the data set used in this analysis is 0.7◦ . The energy threshold of the system increases with zenith angle: for the observations presented here, the average threshold was 480 GeV. The data were calibrated using standard H.E.S.S. calibration procedures, as discussed by Aharonian et al. (2004). The data were analyzed using a Hillas parameter based method as described in Aharonian et al. (2005) with standard cuts, which include a minimum requirement of 80 photo electrons in each camera image. Two

Discovery of gamma-ray emission from the SNR RCW 86 with H.E.S.S.

3

different background estimation procedures were used, as described in Berge et al. (2007). For 2D image generation and morphology studies, the ring background method was applied with a mean ring radius of 0.7◦ . As this method uses an energy averaged radial acceptance correction, the reflected-region background method was applied for spectral studies. In this second background subtraction procedure, OFF events were selected from the same field of view and in the same runs as the ON events by selecting the region symmetric to the ON region with respect to the camera centre. As a cross-check, a second analysis chain, sharing only the raw data and using the “Combined Model” analysis (de Naurois et al. 2005), was also applied to the data. The two analysis methods yield consistent results. 3. RESULTS

Fig. 1.—: H.E.S.S. γ-ray image of RCW 86. The map was smoothed with a Gaussian function with a σsmooth = 4.8′ to reduce the effect of statistical fluctuations. The linear color scale is in units of excess counts per arcmin2 . White contours correspond to 4, 5, 6 σ significance, obtained by counting gamma rays within 0.14◦ from each given location. The image inset in the bottom left corner indicates the size of a point source as seen by H.E.S.S., for an equivalent analysis, smoothing and zenith angles. The centre of the fitted shell, as discussed in the text, is marked by a black cross. The two solid green circles correspond to the inner and outer radii of this shell.

Fig. 2.—: Upper panel: H.E.S.S. radial profiles around the fitted centre of the SNR (αJ2000 = 14h 42m 43s , δJ2000 = −62◦ 26’42”). The solid line shows the result of a projected uniformly-emitting sphere smoothed with the H.E.S.S. point-spread function and fitted to the H.E.S.S. data. The dashed line corresponds to a projection of a thick and spherically symmetric shell. The dotted vertical line illustrates the extent of the region used for the azimuthal profile and for the spectral analysis. Lower panel: Radial profiles of the X-ray data (3-6 keV) from XMM-Newton. These data are background subtracted and smoothed to match the H.E.S.S. angular resolution. Additionally, the obtained excess profile was normalized.

Figure 4 shows the 3-6 keV X-ray map of RCW 86 obtained using six observations of the remnant carried out by the XMM-Newton satellite in 2006 (Vink et al. 2006) and additional observations taken in 2007. The

energy range was selected to avoid as much as possible contamination from line emission from the, in general, cool plasma (< 1 keV) of RCW 86. Potentially, the 3 - 4 keV range could contain some contamination from

excess per arcmin2

A clear VHE γ-ray signal of 8.5σ standard deviation and 1546 ± 183 excess γ-rays is detected from a circular region of 0.45◦ radius, centered on (αJ2000 = 14h 42m 43s , δJ2000 = −62◦ 28′ 48′′ ). This integration region was chosen a priori on the basis of the X-ray data obtained with the ROSAT satellite and fully encompasses the SNR. Figure 1 shows the VHE γ-ray excess map of the 1.6◦ × 1.6◦ region around RCW 86. The map has been smoothed with a Gaussian kernel with a σ of 4.8′ to suppress statistical fluctuations on scales smaller than the H.E.S.S. point-spread function (PSF). The VHE γ-ray excess from RCW 86 is significantly extended beyond the PSF of the instrument, which is illustrated in the bottom left corner of Figure 1. Contours of constant significance are superimposed in white at the 4, 5 and 6σ levels. An excess map has also been produced with the so-called “hard cuts” for better gamma hadron separation, which includes a stricter cut of 200 photo electrons on the image size compared to the “standard cuts”, and was found to be compatible with Figure 1. The VHE emission shown in Figure 1 is suggestive of a shell-like morphology. To test this hypothesis, the brightness profile of a thick shell projected along the line of sight and folded with the H.E.S.S. point-spread function was fit to the unsmoothed excess map. As illustrated in Figure 1, the best fit (χ2 /ndf = 233.1/220) is obtained with an outer radius of 24.43′ ± 1.79′stat, a width of 12.39′ ± 4.22′stat and a centre of the shell at (αJ2000 = 14h 42m 42.96s ±14.1sstat, δJ2000 = −62◦ 26′ 41.6′′ ± 66.5′′stat ). Figure 2 shows the radial profile of the VHE excess relative to the fitted centre. The fit of the radial profiles to the data points results in a chi-square per degree of freedom of χ2 /ndf = 2.85/7 for a projected shell (determined by outer ring radius, ring width and absolute normalization) which is not significantly better than the fit of a projected uniformly-emitting sphere characterized by a ring radius and a normalization factor (χ2 /ndf = 5.43/8). Also visible in Figure 1 is an apparent deficit of γ-rays at the western part of the SNR. However, the azimuthal profile in Figure 3 is consistent with a constant and reveals that this dip is not significant (χ2 /ndf = 1.47/5).

1.2

H.E.S.S. excess Shell Fit Sphere Fit

1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

norm. excess

0

1

0.5

0

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6 θ [degr]

F. A. Aharonian et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 0.8

10

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

20 Declination (J2000)

excess per arcmin2

4

0.3 0.2

norm. excess

0.1 0 1

30

0.8 0.6 -62° 40′

0.4 0.2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350 φ [degr]

For the spectral analysis, the source region (ON region) is defined by a circle of 0.5◦ radius centered on the best fit position of the shell, chosen to fully enclose the whole source. The radius of the extraction region is illustrated in Figure 2. The spectrum obtained (see Figure 5) is well described by a power-law with a photon index of 2.54 ± 0.12stat ± 0.20sys and a flux normalisation at 1

44 43 42 Right Ascension (J2000)

41

40

TeV of (3.72 ± 0.50stat ± 0.8sys ) × 10−12 cm−2 s−1 TeV−1 (χ2 /ndf = 6.30/4). The integral flux in the energy range 1 - 10 TeV is (2.34 ± 0.3stat ± 0.5sys ) × 10−12 cm−2 s−1 , which corresponds to ∼ 10% of the integrated flux of the Crab nebula in the same energy interval. No significant improvement is obtained by fitting a power-law with an exponential cut-off (χ2 /ndf = 2.96/3). If the fit range is restricted to energies below 10 TeV, a photon index of 2.41 ± 0.16stat ± 0.20sys and a flux normalisation at 1 TeV of (3.57 ± 0.5stat ± 0.8sys ) × 10−12 cm−2 s−1 TeV−1 are determined (χ2 /ndf = 0.68/2), compatible with the fit of the SNR in the whole energy range.

dN/dE (TeV-1 cm-2 s-1)

Ar and Ca lines, but no such line emission is seen in the available Chandra, XMM-Newton (Vink et al. 2006) or Suzaku spectra (Ueno et al. 2007). This map was obtained by first automatically cleaning the observations of > 3σ excursions to the mean count rate, thus minimizing the background of the maps. Then, for each observation and for each of the three detectors (MOS1, MOS2, and PN), a background count rate in the 3-6 keV band was determined using a relatively empty region of the field of view. In the final stage, the background image was subtracted from the count rate image, and then corrected using the exposure maps obtained with the standard XMM-Newton SAS 7.1.0 software (which includes vignetting correction), in order to obtain the background corrected map displayed in Figure 4. An overall positional agreement with the H.E.S.S. contours derived from Figure 1 as well as a good compatibility between the outer radius of the γ-ray emission (24.43′ ± 1.79′stat ) and the extension of the X-ray emission can be observed. However, the emission peak apparent in the X-ray azimuthal profile is not visible in γ-rays (Figure 3). Furthermore, the dip in surface brightness at the center of the remnant seems more pronounced in the X-ray radial profiles (Figure 2). A more detailed comparison of the γ-ray and X-ray morphologies would require higher statistics than presently available, and hence will have to await future longer observations.

45

Fig. 4.—: Excess contours of γ-ray emission (0.55, 0.8, 1.05 γ-rays per arcmin2 Gaussian smoothed with σsmooth = 4.8′ ) superimposed on the background subtracted XMM-Newton EPIC (MOS/PN) 3-6 keV X-ray image of the remnant.

10-11 10-12 10-13 10-14 10-15 10-16 10-17 Residuals - ∆F/F

Upper panel: H.E.S.S. azimuthal profile integrated over a region of 0.5◦ radius covering the SNR RCW 86. The azimuthal angle is calculated with respect to the fitted shell centre. 0◦ corresponds to the North part of the source and 90◦ to the East. The solid line shows the result of a fit of the data to a constant which yields a chi-square of 1.47 for 5 degrees of freedom. Lower panel: Azimuthal profiles of the X-ray data (3-6 keV) from XMM-Newton. These data are background subtracted and smoothed to match the H.E.S.S. angular resolution. Additionally, the obtained excess profile was normalized.

14h 46m

Fig. 3.—:

1

10

Energy (TeV)

1

10

Energy (TeV)

2 0 -2

Fig. 5.—: Differential energy spectrum of RCW 86, extracted from a circular region of 0.5◦ radius around the position (αJ2000 = 14h 42m 43s , δJ2000 = −62◦ 26’42”) adjusted to the H.E.S.S. data to enclose the whole source. The solid line shows the result of a pure power-law fit. The error bars denote 1σ statistical errors; the upper limit (arrow) is estimated at the 2σ level. The bottom panel shows the residuals to the power-law fit. Events with energies between 600 GeV and 60 TeV were used in the determination of the spectrum.

Discovery of gamma-ray emission from the SNR RCW 86 with H.E.S.S. 4. DISCUSSION

There are two commonly invoked mechanisms for VHE γ-ray production in young supernova remnants, inverse Compton (IC) scattering of high energy electrons off ambient photons (leptonic scenario) and π 0 meson production in inelastic interactions of accelerated protons with ambient gas (hadronic scenario). In such a hadronic scenario, a comparison between the expected thermal X-ray emission and the actually measured thermal emission has to await deeper observations in which one can better determined whether the TeV emission traces the denser, thermal X-ray emitting parts of the SNR, or is more closely correlated with the X-ray synchrotron emission from the remnant. The measured γ-ray spectrum from RCW 86, restricted to energies below 10 TeV, translates into an energy flux between 1 and 10 TeV of 8.6 × 10−12 erg cm−2 s−1 . The X-ray spectrum of the whole remnant is mixed between thermal and non-thermal emission. Assuming that the hard X-ray continuum originates from non-thermal synchrotron emission as reported by Rho et al. (2002), Vink et al. (2006) and Ueno et al. (2007), the measurement made by Petre et al. (1999) using RXTE data provides an estimate of the total amount of non-thermal flux from RCW 86. They find that the spectrum is well fitted by a power-law of index ∼ 3 and a flux normalization at 10 keV of 10−4 cm−2 s−1 keV−1 , which extrapolated down to the 0.7 to 10 keV band leads to an integral flux of 2.1 × 10−10 erg cm−2 s−1 . In a leptonic scenario, assuming that the γ-ray emission is entirely due to the IC process on cosmic microwave background photons, the ratio of the synchrotron power and IC power radiated is often used to constrain the magnetic field. For a powerlaw distribution of electron energies, Kγ −p , the general equation relating the synchrotron power (PS ) produced by electrons with Lorentz factors between γ1,X and γ2,X and the IC power (PIC ) radiated between γ1,IC and γ2,IC can be expressed as follow: 3−p 3−p UB (γ2,X − γ1,X ) PS = 3−p 3−p PIC Uph (γ2,IC − γ1,IC )

(1)

where Uph and UB are the energy density of the photon field and the energy density of the magnetic field, respectively. It should be noted here that, for a fixed X-ray energy, γ1,X and γ2,X are inversely proportional to the square root of the magnetic field. If X-rays and γ-rays probe the same region of the electron spectrum, one finds the standard relation between the synchrotron B S = UUph . Assuming that the target phoand IC power PPIC ton field is the cosmic microwave background, a magnetic field of 30 µG can be estimated using Equation 1 and the synchrotron photon index of ∼ 3, independent of the distance and age of the SNR. This estimate is compatible with that of Vink et al. (2006) based on thin filaments resolved by Chandra (assuming a distance of 2.5 kpc) in which the authors also deduce a high speed of the blast wave (∼ 2700 km s−1); their estimated value would increase to ∼ 50 µG for a distance of 1 kpc. However, it is still a factor of 2 lower than the maximum field strength determined by V¨ olk et al. (2005) using a lower shock velocity of 800 km s−1 as suggested by optical data in the Southern region of the SNR (Rosado et al. 1996). The difference between the field amplification estimated

5

by Vink et al. (2006) and that of V¨ olk et al. (2005) lies in the fact that V¨ olk et al. obtained a higher result when they de-projected the measured filament width, as for an ideal spherical shock, whereas Vink et al. did not. Without de-projection the two results remarkably agree, even though they were obtained for the southern side and the northern side, respectively. A discussion of de-projection for RCW 86 is given in V¨ olk et al. (2005). With similar data, Bamba et al. (2005) deduced a significantly lower magnetic field strength of ∼ 4 − 12 µG. However, their analysis is based on rather different assumptions on the nature of filament formation. In a hadronic scenario, one can estimate the total energy in accelerated protons Wp in the range 10 − 100 TeV required to produce the γ-ray luminosity Lγ observed by H.E.S.S. using the relation Wp (10 − 100 TeV) ≈
−1 n τγ ×Lγ (1−10 TeV), in which τγ ≈ 4.9×1015 1 cm s −3 is the characteristic cooling time of protons through the π 0 production channel (Kelner et al. 2006). The total energy injected in protons is calculated by extrapolating the proton spectrum down to 1 GeV. Because of this extrapolation over 4 decades in energy, the uncertainty of the estimate can be as large as a factor of 10. Assuming that the relatively steep slope of the proton spectrum (as inferred from the observed γ-ray spectrum) is the result of an energy cut-off (somewhere around several tens of TeV in proton energy), and that at lower energies the proton spectrum has a E −2 type spectrum representative of those predicted by the diffusive shock acceleration theory, the total energy budget in all protons for the distance of 2.5 kpc and the ambient gas density between 0.3 cm−3 and 0.7 cm−3 (Bocchino et al. 2000), would be (2 − 4) × 1050 erg. This estimate is in reasonable agreement with theoretical expectations that a significant fraction of the explosion energy of 1051 erg is released in relativistic protons. On the other hand, if the power-law spectrum of protons continues to GeV energies with the spectral index Γ = 2.4 (i.e. similar to the gamma-ray spectrum below 10 TeV), the total budget in protons would exceed a few times 1051 erg for a distance of 2.5 kpc. This would exclude the hadronic origin of TeV γ-rays, unless the SNR is nearby (∼ 1 kpc), or the γ-rays are produced in very dense regions. Indeed, Pisarski et al. (1984) and Claas et al. (1989) reported that there is a large density contrast across the remnant, e.g. in the South, where the density could be as high as 10 cm−3 ; with such a dense medium, a larger distance for the remnant could still be compatible with the observed γ-ray flux. 5. CONCLUSIONS

H.E.S.S. observations have led to the discovery of the shell-type SNR RCW 86 in VHE γ-rays. The γ-ray signal is significantly more extended than the H.E.S.S. pointspread function. The possibility of a shell-like morphology was addressed, but cannot be settled on the basis of the limited statistics available at the moment. The flux from the remnant is ∼10% of that from the Crab nebula, with a photon index of about 2.5. The question of the nature of the particles producing the γ-ray signal observed by H.E.S.S. is also discussed. In a leptonic scenario, assuming that the γ-ray emission is entirely due to the IC process on cosmic microwave background photons and that the synchrotron and IC

6

F. A. Aharonian et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration)

photons are produced by the same electrons, the ratio of the γ-ray energy flux and the X-ray flux determines the magnetic field to be close to 30 µG. In the hadronic scenario, the lack of information about the low-energy γ-ray spectrum results in large uncertainties on the total energy budget in protons. If below several tens of TeV, the proton spectrum has a E −2 type spectrum, the total energy in protons would be in reasonable agreement with theoretical expectations. On the other hand, if we assume that the proton spectrum continues down to GeV energies with the observed spectral index Γ = 2.4, energetics would rule out a hadronic origin for the TeV γ-rays unless the SNR is nearby, or if the γ-rays are produced in a very dense medium as reported in the southern part of the remnant.

University of Namibia in facilitating the construction and operation of H.E.S.S. is gratefully acknowledged, as is the support by the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF), the Max Planck Society, the French Ministry for Research, the CNRS-IN2P3 and the Astroparticle Interdisciplinary Programme of the CNRS, the U.K. Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), the IPNP of the Charles University, the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the South African Department of Science and Technology and National Research Foundation, and by the University of Namibia. We appreciate the excellent work of the technical support staff in Berlin, Durham, Hamburg, Heidelberg, Palaiseau, Paris, Saclay, and in Namibia in the construction and operation of the equipment.

The support of the Namibian authorities and of the REFERENCES Aharonian, F., 2001, A&A, 112, 307 Aharonian, F., (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 2004, APh, 22, 109 Aharonian, F., et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 2005, A&A, 430, 865 Aharonian, F., et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 2006, A&A, 457, 899 Aharonian, F., et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 2007a, A&A, 464, 235 Aharonian, F., et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration) 2007b, A&A, 661, 236 Albert, J., et al. 2007, A&A, 474, 937 Bamba, A., Koyama, K., & Tomida, H., 2000, PASJ, 52, 1157 Bamba, A., Yamazaki, R., Yoshida, T., Terasawa, T., & Koyama, K., 2005, ApJ, 621, 793 Berge, D., Funk, S., & Hinton, J., 2007, A&A, 466, 1219 Berezhko, E. G., & V¨ olk, H. J., 2006, A&A, 451, 981 Bernl¨ ohr, K., et al., 2003, APh, 20, 111 Bocchino, F., Vink, J., Favata, F., Maggio, A., & Sciortino, S., 2000, A&A, 360, 671 Borkowski, K. J., Arnaud, K. A., Dorman, B., Hughes, J. P., Sarazin, C. L., & Smith, R. A., 2001, ApJ, 550, 334 Claas, J.J., Kaastra, J. S., Smith, A., Peacock, A., & de Korte, P. A. J., 1989, ApJ, 337, 399 Clark, D., & Stephenson, F., 1977, The Historical Supernovae (Oxford: Pergamon Press), 83 Hinton, J. A., 2004, NewAR, 48, 331 Kelner, S. R., Aharonian, F. A., & Bugayov, V. V., 2006, Physical Review D, 74, 3 Kesteven, M. J., & Caswell, J. L., 1987, A&A, 183, 118 de Naurois, M. et al. 2005, in Proceedings of the conference “Towards a Network of Atmospheric Cherenkov Detectors VII”, ed. B. Degrange & G. Fontaine (Palaiseau: Ecole Polytechnique), 173

Petre, R., Allen, G. E., & Hwang, U., 1999, Astron. Nachr., 320, 199 Pisarski, P. L., Helfand, D. J., & Kahn, S. M., 1984, ApJ, 277, 710 Porter, T. A., Moskalenko, I. V., & Strong, A. W. 2006, ApJ, 648, L29 Rho, J., Dyer, K. K., Borkowski, K. J., & Reynolds, S. P., 2002, ApJ, 581, 1116 Rosado, M., Ambrocio-Cruz, P., Le Coarer, E., & Marcelin, M., 1996, A&A, 315, 243 Smith, R. C., 1997, AJ, 114, 2664 Ueno, M., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, 171 Vincent, P., et al. 2003, in Proceedings of the 28th International Cosmic Ray Conference, T. Kajita et al., Eds. (Universal Academy Press, Tokyo, 2003), 2887 Vink, J., Bleeker, J., Van Der Heyden, K., Bykov, A., Bamba, A., & Yamazaki, R., 2006, ApJL, 648, 33 V¨ olk, H. J., Berezhko, E. G., & Ksenofontov, L. T., 2005, A&A, 433, 229 Watanabe, S., et al. (CANGAROO Collaboration) 2003, in Proceedings of the 28th International Cosmic Ray Conference, IUPAP, Eds: T. Kajita et al., 2397 Winkler Jr., P. F., 1978, ApJ, 221, 220